US Soldiers Pose With Dead Civilian Corpses

Remember Abu Ghraib?

US Army 'kill team' in Afghanistan posed for photos of murdered civilians

Commanders brace for backlash of anti-US sentiment that could be more damaging than after the Abu Ghraib scandal

Commanders in Afghanistan are bracing themselves for possible riots and public fury triggered by the publication of "trophy" photographs of US soldiers posing with the dead bodies of defenceless Afghan civilians they killed.

Senior officials at Nato's International Security Assistance Force in Kabul have compared the pictures published by the German news weekly Der Spiegel to the images of US soldiers abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq which sparked waves of anti-US protests around the world.

They fear that the pictures could be even more damaging as they show the aftermath of the deliberate murders of Afghan civilians by a rogue US Stryker tank unit that operated in the southern province of Kandahar last year.

Some of the activities of the self-styled "kill team" are already public, with 12 men currently on trial in Seattle for their role in the killing of three civilians.

Five of the soldiers are on trial for pre-meditated murder, after they staged killings to make it look like they were defending themselves from Taliban attacks.

Other charges include the mutilation of corpses, the possession of images of human casualties and drug abuse.

All of the soldiers have denied the charges. They face the death penalty or life in prison if convicted.

The case has already created shock around the world, particularly with the revelations that the men cut "trophies" from the bodies of the people they killed.

An investigation by Der Spiegel has unearthed approximately 4,000 photos and videos taken by the men.

The magazine, which is planning to publish only three images, said that in addition to the crimes the men were on trial for there are "also entire collections of pictures of other victims that some of the defendants were keeping".

The US military has strived to keep the pictures out of the public domain fearing it could inflame feelings at a time when anti-Americanism in Afghanistan is already running high.

In a statement, the army said it apologised for the distress caused by photographs "depicting actions repugnant to us as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States".

The lengthy Spiegel article that accompanies the photographs contains new details about the sadistic behaviour of the men.

In one incident in May last year, the article says, during a patrol, the team apprehended a mullah who was standing by the road and took him into a ditch where they made him kneel down.

The group's leader, Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs, then allegedly threw a grenade at the man while an order was given for him to be shot.

Afterwards, Gibbs is described cutting off one of the man's little fingers and removing a tooth.

The patrol team later claimed to their superiors that the mullah had tried to threaten them with a grenade and that they had no choice but to shoot.

On Sunday night many organisations employing foreign staff, including the United Nations, ordered their staff into a "lockdown", banning all movements around Kabul and requiring people to remain in their compounds.

In addition to the threat from the publication of the photographs, security has been heightened amid fears the Taliban may try to attack Persian new year celebrations.

There could also be attacks because Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, is due to make a speech declaring which areas of the country should be transferred from international to Afghan control in the coming months.

One security manager for the US company DynCorp sent an email to clients warning that publication of the photos was likely "to incite the local population" as the "severity of the incidents to be revealed are graphic and extreme".

Looks like the Obama Administration has changed nothing from the time of Bush.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar...-civilians

Edit: Yes it is legally Obama's responsibility as Commander and Chief.

Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol I) (with annexes, Final Act of the Diplomatic Conference on the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts dated 10 June 1977 and resolutions adopted at the fourth session). Adopted at Geneva on 8 June 1977
Article 87.
DUTY OF COMMANDERS.
1. The High Contracting Parties and the Parties to the conflict shall require military commanders, with respect to members of the armed forces under their command and other persons under their control, to prevent and, where necessary, to suppress and to report to competent authorities breaches of the Conventions and of this Protocol.
2. In order to prevent and suppress breaches, High Contracting Parties and
Parties to the conflict shall require that, commensurate with their level of responsi
bility, commanders ensure that members of the armed forces under their command
are aware of their obligations under the Conventions and this Protocol.
3. The High Contracting Parties and Parties to the conflict shall require any
commander who is aware that subordinates or other persons under his control are
going to commit or have committed a breach of the Conventions or of this Protocol,
to initiate such steps as are necessary to prevent such violations of the Conventions or
this Protocol, and, where appropriate, to initiate disciplinary or penal action against
violators thereof.

That's right. The actions of people with free will are the fault of Obama.

While I agree they are horrifying, stupid, unemotional, fucking, pieces of assholes that deserve many years/life/death sentence, it's not Obama's fault.

That's right. The actions of people with free will are the fault of Obama.

When you are in a leadership position, thats the way it works. It does not matter if you do it or not or even if you know about it, as the leader, everything is your fault. Thats just the way it is.

Stupid kids.

This kind of stupid pomegranate is why I tend to think twice when calling myself American.

I know other countries do this kind of thing too, but when it's to this extent, it's just downright embarrassing. I couldn't even imagine being in the US military right now...

See Kanevaldier, the "way it is" is separate from personal opinion. And it is of my opinion that Obama is at no fault here, whether the system (which I am free to disagree with OR ARE YOU TAKING AWAY MY RIGHTS YOU UNCONSTITUTIONAL BASTARD BLA BLA BLA) puts the blame on him or not.

While I agree they are horrifying, stupid, unemotional, pineappleing, pieces of pimentos that deserve many years/life/death sentence, it's not Obama's fault.

Obama is commander and cheif of the Armed Forces. He is responsible for all actions taken by our military.
If he can't handle the responsibilities of being a leader (which include making you responsible of the actions of your subordinates), then he doesnt deserve the position.

And for those still stuck in the Right-Left Paradigm, this is just another reason to show that right hand and left hand are of the same body, and the New Boss (Obama) is the same as the Old Boss (Bush).

I should make one final note and say that claiming Obama is not responsible would mean that Bush isnt responsible for the torture that occured under his watch.

It's... horrible to think that some people want to join the army just to kill.

Looks like the Obama Administration has changed nothing from the time of Bush.

I will not take you seriously anymore.

You did in the first place?

It's... horrible to think that some people want to join the army just to kill.

There are a LOT of people like that out there. A lot more than you think.

Also; It's pretty stupid to honestly think full blame can be put on Obama, whether he's responsible for his subordinates or not. He can't control every little thing every soldier does in the military. It was their choice, not Obama's.

The ONLY way Obama is responsible is systematically (which I consider stupid). This is no personal responsibility of his whatsoever.

Obama is commander and cheif of the Armed Forces. He is responsible for all actions taken by our military.
If he can't handle the responsibilities of being a leader (which include making you responsible of the actions of your subordinates), then he doesnt deserve the position.

And for those still stuck in the Right-Left Paradigm, this is just another reason to show that right hand and left hand are of the same body, and the New Boss (Obama) is the same as the Old Boss (Bush).

I should make one final note and say that claiming Obama is not responsible would mean that Bush isnt responsible for the torture that occured under his watch.

hahaha

There are a LOT of people like that out there. A lot more than you think.

Also; It's pretty stupid to honestly think full blame can be put on Obama, whether he's responsible for his subordinates or not. He can't control every little thing every soldier does in the military. It was their choice, not Obama's.

If he cant control his subordinates, then he has no right to lead.

It's... horrible to think that some people want to join the army just to kill.



I will not take you seriously anymore.

You ever did?

The news forum has been intolerable since Anonymous Moose and (to a lesser extent) Kanevaldier joined. Anonymous has a ridiculous raging hate on for Obama and calls everything he does unconstitutional and blames him for all of the worlds issue (GOD IT'S RAINING TODAY pineapple YOU OBAMA) and Kanevaledier is just an extreme republican which is meh, even if I don't agree with what he says most of the time it seems like he understands what he's saying, though to some extent he also blames Obama for issues too much.

This is pretty disgusting, though. The armed forces need more supervision or something, though it's not surprising that when you enlist a bunch of kids fresh out of high school they act like the worst pineappletards on the planet.

The Constitution is something I think needs to go. But that's another point.

And to Moose, the torture under Bush happened with clear evidence it was happening for a prolonged amount of time. This is a single occurrence of which Obama did not have pre-knowledge. Say hello to your main difference.

We're going to put this in the context of the recent hero Casey Haynes. The teacher is standing in front of Casey and Ritchard, watching Casey being hit and does nothing. The teacher, Bush, is at fault. The other teacher, Obama, has his back turned pre-occupied with something of great importance and hears no complaints or anything from anyone, no knowledge that it could be happening. This teacher is not at fault.

If he cant control his subordinates, then he has no right to lead.

Should you ever have a leadership position over hundreds of thousands of people, I'll make sure to blame you for every bad thing they do.

Honestly, let's be realistic. No one person can control the actions of someone else, yet here you are claiming Obama is responsible at fault for the choices of these Americans. Amazing.

EDIT: MasPan worded it more effectively.

The Constitution is something I think needs to go. But that's another point.

I don't think it really needs to go, but rather rewritten to reflect today's society and laws. Most of what's in the constitution still holds firm, but it has holes in some places and the revision of the constitution all of the time confuses the hell out of the government for some reason.

[video=youtube;UQXZoM__vU0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXZoM__vU0[/video]
What's the problem with calling a man out on his own lies?
He promised to end torture. He has the power as the commander and cheif of the armed forces. But what have we seen? We have seen that torture is still allowed under his administration.

@above, the constitution has is allowed to be amended to change with the times. However, instead of amending it, the government ignores it.

Obama is commander and cheif of the Armed Forces. He is responsible for all actions taken by our military.
If he can't handle the responsibilities of being a leader (which include making you responsible of the actions of your subordinates), then he doesnt deserve the position.

And for those still stuck in the Right-Left Paradigm, this is just another reason to show that right hand and left hand are of the same body, and the New Boss (Obama) is the same as the Old Boss (Bush).

I should make one final note and say that claiming Obama is not responsible would mean that Bush isnt responsible for the torture that occured under his watch.

[color="#cc8899"]He is responsible for their actions yes - military personnel are, in a sense, representatives of the United States, and their entire chain of command, all the way up to Obama, is responsible for their actions. A soldier killing a foreign civilian could reasonably be grounds for war, depending on circumstances, regardless of whether the soldier is acting of their own accord or under orders.

However, these soldiers were rogue, acting of their own accord in blatant disregard for orders or morals. While Obama is responsible for their actions, he is not at fault, nor to blame for them. However, the burden of dealing with their repercussions does fall on him.

While he is responsible, he is not to blame.[/COLOR]